Appeal No. 95-4206
Application No. 07/803,465
Sarraf wherein receptacles 86 are depicted for various
connections with other units.
Thus, we will also sustain the rejection of claim 29 and
its dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103.
With regard to claims 34 and 35 which recite a “rack” for
mounting the memory storage disk modules, the examiner relies
on the teaching of Varaiya for the suggestion of such a rack.
Since we find no substantive argument by appellants with
regard to this limitation, we will accept the examiner’s
position and sustain the rejection of claims 34 and 35 under
35 U.S.C. 103.
With regard to independent claim 37, this is merely a
counterpart method claim to previous apparatus claims. We
find nothing therein which would have been unobvious over the
manner of constructing the device of Sarraf as modified by the
teachings of Dodson.
Independent claim 40 includes limitations which have all
been discussed supra regarding the first and second cooling
fans and the apertures in the front and rear portions of the
cover and we will sustain the rejection of claim 40, and its
dependent claims, for similar reasons.
14
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007